September 22, 2019

“Christianity” Standing in the Way of Totalitarian Rule

Really? Maybe or maybe not. 

First, let’s look at Google’s definition of Totalitarianism: “a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.”

CBN News is reporting that China’s communist government and leadership are claiming that Christianity is standing in the way of their desired totalitarian rule.

To exam this more closely and honestly we must understand totalitarianism and what or who is Christianity along with the context in which this article is written.

China is most commonly referred to as a communist country. However, leaders before the onslaught of the existing government began reforms that allowed China to participate in at least a quasi-capitalist country of making, selling and importing and exporting goods. We can’t lose sight of the fact that China’s quest toward totalitarianism is nothing more than a modified form of communism that has been rapidly approaching that of the United States.

Some would protest the idea that the United States is a nation of totalitarianism promoted by eager, albeit perhaps unknowingly, totalitarians. How so?

If we look at the definition of totalitarianism above, it says that it is a “system of government that is centralized and dictatorial.” To deny the system of American government as anything but centralized is to live a blind existence. What really throws off most people is the idea that America’s system of government cannot be totalitarian because it is run as a two-party system, not of a lone dictator.

It would take pages of information to explain that the two-party system is fake – it’s a false paradigm, ignorantly and blindly played by eager totalitarians wishing “their” party of choice was always in power. The reality is that it always is in power because the idea of a differing two-party political system is all for show. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans run and control this country. It is done by a more centralized dictatorial power structure few are interested in learning anything about. After all, the concept is frightening. Something most never want to deal with.

The definition also states that in order for totalitarianism to function it must have complete subservience to the state. Practicing totalitarians in this country eagerly promote, as subservient slaves, the party rule. In their own ignorance, they know not what they are doing. They want to work to create laws that steal away their rights and independence believing changes in this existence is for the better good, failing to learn and understand history involving the implementation of terrible and oppressive government systems.

The article in reference states that China’s leadership declares that “Christianity” is prohibiting their road to complete totalitarian rule. But what is “Christianity” in the context used? 

Often the term Christianity is used as a general term that describes anything that isn’t Muslim, Buddhist, or any other “faith” group that appears to stand in China’s way.

Without getting into a debate about the differences between so-called Christianity and those who are genuinely Spirit-filled, born-again followers of Yahweh/Yeshua, let’s just say that the article doesn’t offer any real specificity when it comes to who, precisely, are the Christians being persecuted.

However, because the totalitarian rule requires complete servitude to the dictatorial ruler/centralized government, any group with any sense of power that teaches anything that might contradict the totalitarian rule of law, has to be cleansed from the government system. This would take a far longer period of time to get washed out of the American form of government as it would one that only a short time ago was communistic.

Changes taking place in the United States, are geared toward the destruction of independent thought and the outlawing of government opposition through censorship and/or other methods of ridding such existences. We currently see this ridding of a nation of alternative thought and political idealism as we see followers of both sides of the fake two-party system wanting to outlaw all ideology that runs counter to their party culture and ideology.  The American system of government desires the complete subservience to the false paradigm of their government. They get this in a bit of an odd way by convincing the masses that differences of political power and authority exist in two distinct political idealisms when in fact they are really one and the same.

As this government system works toward ridding society of any and all groups and individuals opposing dictatorial rule and the loss of all rights, the closer they are getting to that One World Rule where control over the people can exist without any real opposition.

The lies continue while ignorant deniers of reality allow for the perpetuity of the false paradigm of two parties. We see it today in news headlines, whether or not those headlines are real, fake, or something in between.

Trump built his campaign in his run to be president of the United States by bringing millions on board to build that infamous wall between the U.S. and Mexico. And how has that progressed?

Today, we learn that any notion of funding for such a wall is nonexistent. If I had said to you three or more years ago that there would never be a wall erected between the U.S. and Mexico, I would have been scoffed because Trump True Believers knew better. His party wanted the wall. The “other” party claimed they didn’t want it, even though the party leader, Bill Clinton, had convinced everyone it was a necessity to have a wall. 

We also discover today that Donald Trump, the lying faker of Second Amendment rights, who used this lie to bring millions of voters to his side, even though in the past he was a strong supporter of Bill Clinton’s Assault Weapons Ban, is making his move to make sure the so-called “bump-stock” design of weapons is made unlawful.

Might I also remind readers of the fake Republican Trump, a member of the real universal political party headed by other Global Power Structure members, suggested that it was a good thing to arrest people and lock them up and then sort out the laws and constitutional application to any such arrests? Do you still want to deny the existence of American totalitarianism?

Political parties are a sham, a distraction, a shell game but an effective tool successfully used to bring this nation in line with totalitarianism, whose only deterrent is the few who are not quite yet willing to be in complete servitude to the dictatorial rule being manufactured. It will come.

Perhaps some forms of Christianity, those that teach independence, follow Yahweh’s commandments, and walk under the guidance of the Spirit of Truth, stand in the way of China’s and the United States’ striving toward totalitarian rule, but as I see it, it is anyone or group of people who in any way suggest opposition to this act. You don’t have to be a “Christian” to be standing in any government’s way that might affect their progress to a desired system of government.

The only way complete subservience to a state and/or a leader can exist is when a person’s will and desire to be independent is taken from them. I can tell you that a true Christian, walking in Yehweh’s Light stands in the way of a better form of centralized government and dictatorial rule.

Share

The Strength of Individualism, The Weakness of Collectivism

I contend that there is no greater strength and power than that of combined individualism and independence. Most of all the greatest accomplishments of men came from those true individuals allowed to carry out their independent thoughts. Governments, on the other hand, thrive in the collective where manipulative actions toward the people are necessary in order to maintain the masses into a near hypnotic state of silent acquiescence, stripping them of any sort of power to push back against the governments that threaten them.

Imagine how things would be if the majority of people were a collection of true individuals and independent thinkers. What power would lie in their hands? Can a collective exist of independents? In theory, yes! Governments and those who promote governmental collectivism must fear the thought for it threatens their very existence. Sounds like war to me.

Perhaps the greatest example of the power and strength of individualism can be found in Bible history. We may have head knowledge of the existence of Yahweh’s “Church,” but do we truly understand its composition? Some would argue that the congregations of churches, making up the “Church,” is similar to the collective existence of governments. This may be true in some cases, but the true Church of Christ is made up of real individuals, each with their independent, spirit-filled relationship with their Savior. There can be no other everlasting existence even though so many are caught up in the collective of the church instead of the individual salvation of their Savior.

It is a rare commodity these days to find actual individuals with independent thoughts and ideas. Media so heavily influences and controls us that it seems impossible to escape the onslaught. Life in the United States exists between two enemy collectives – Republican and Democrat. Absent independent thought, each person eventually acquiesces to one side or the other, eager to become automatonic True Believers, participants in each party’s form of Romanistic Bread and Circuses.

If it’s not the false paradigm of Republican and Democrat, groups and mass movements are countless within our society, each bent on achieving their selfish agendas at the expense of ostracising anyone and everyone who doesn’t eagerly conform to their dogma.

Remembering that the collective can only exist by controlling the minds and thoughts of the masses, we see the need for groups and movements to make enemies out of those who don’t conform. I’m reminded of the Star Trek enemy of the United Starship Federation – The Borg. The Borg, a combination of human and robot, is a collective. They call themselves the Collective. None have independent thought. On the contrary, they all share their thoughts in a continual bombardment of back and forth, never-ending, noise. One of the missions of the Borg is to “assimilate” anyone who is not like them. To “assimilate,” people are turned into half human, half robot creatures who almost never stray from the collective as it would mean certain death. Are the Borg that much unlike what we are seeing today with our collectives in American Society?

Eric Hoffer, the author of “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements,” writes: “The permanent misfits can find salvation only in a complete separation from the self; and they usually find it by losing themselves in the compact collectivity of a mass movement.”

He also states: “The quality of ideas seems to play a minor role in mass movement leadership. What counts is the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of the opinion of others, the singlehanded defiance of the world.”

As I have repeatedly stated, collectives can only exist absent the individual with independent thoughts and ideas. To ensure that absence, Hoffer says that what must exist within the collective, “is the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of the opinion of others, the singlehanded defiance of the world.”

This exists everywhere!!!

From the outside of each collective looking in, most often “quality of ideas” is missing. It is replaced by the importance of “sticking together” and “remaining united” while echoing the propaganda crafted by the collective – a real “defiance of the world.”

Straying from, or at least presenting independent thought and individualism, within a collective, in our society, often does not end in death to that brave soul truth seeker, but they are truly ostracised, kicked out of the gang for failure to assimilate and remain the robotic servant it is intended for them to be, thus removing any hope of achieving another of man’s great accomplishments.

Perhaps you, too, have been a victim of being expelled from a collective. Being a part of a group for the purpose of educating and bringing to the forefront important and truthful information pertaining to the subject of that collective, is not a bad thing. Should one dare disagree with the collective, or present truth that might be contrary to the collective’s talking points, you are removed from further communication – essentially black-balled.

If the most important accomplishments of men have come from individuals with independent thoughts and the freedom to exercise their freedoms, why then is it that our society seems bent on ensuring that never happens. An independent thinker might wonder if this act isn’t part of the intentions of another collective, threatened by the existence of those of us who honestly cherish their individuality. To them, we must assimilate.

If we are so much assimilated into the myriad of collectives, how can we have any hope of individuality and independence?

And isn’t that the entire premise of which I am attempting to convey? Being in this state, it is a near impossibility, short a miracle, for anyone to recognize they have no real independence, no real freedom, and certainly no respect for being an individual other than the one dictated by the collective.

Come out of her my people.

Share

SHOCK: NR House Committee Discovers “Post-Normal” Science in ESA

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, December 15, 2014

Committee Report Uncovers Lack of Independence & Accountability of Peer Review Process for ESA Listing Decisions

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Natural Resources Committee majority staff released a report today that questions the independence and accountability of the peer review process in recent Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing decisions. The report entitled, “Under the Microscope: An examination of the questionable science and lack of independent peer review in Endangered Species Act listing decisions” studies the federal government’s peer review process for 13 different ESA listing decisions made by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) since July 2013. The report found numerous examples of potential bias and conflicts of interests with the peer reviewers and a lack of transparency and consistency in the peer
review process.

“The decision of whether or not to list a species under the Endangered Species Act has significant implications for the economy and livelihoods of impacted communities and private landowners. As such, these important decisions must be based on sound science that has undergone an independent peer review. This report raises troubling concerns about the lack of independence of the peer review process and whether many current, upcoming or recently finalized listing decisions, such as the White Bluffs Bladderpod in my Central Washington district, are scientifically sound,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04). “With hundreds of ESA listings driven by this Administration’s closed-door settlements with litigious groups, discovery of any potential bias about how ESA data and science are reviewed casts serious doubt on the credibility of these decisions, and provides more evidence that the ESA needs continued oversight and updating.”

Specific findings of the report include:

* The FWS does not have clear or consistent policies and procedures in place across all Regions to ensure that peer reviewers with potential conflicts of interest are identified and screened;

* The FWS generally seeks peer review of its proposed listing decisions at the same time they are made available for public comment, rather than earlier in the process when the peer reviewers may have more meaningful input;

* The FWS regularly recruits the same scientists on whose work a listing decision is based to serve as peer reviewers, including those who have known policy positions or affiliations with advocacy groups that support the listing decision, rather than truly independent scientists;

* The FWS uses scientists as peer reviewers who have received grants or other financial assistance from the Department of the Interior and its bureaus and other agencies; and

* The FWS routinely withholds from the public the identities of peer reviewers, qualifications of peer reviewers, and details about their comments.

Share